Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'ganking'.
Found 19 results
-
I seem to recall some time ago that @admin stated that anything that encouraged PVP was good and anything that doesn't is bad (or something like that). It is apparent, to me at least, that some nations dominate the PZ by sheer numbers and that this discourages other nation players from entering the PZ to avoid seal clubbing whilst for the zerg nation there are few targets. My suggestion is that a nations participation in the PZ is limited by the number of its ships within. One possibility is to regulate numbers is by using a ticketing system, where tickets are 'purchased' from a port and expire on end of a partaking PZ battle or after 15 minutes of purchase if a PZ battle is not joined. A ticket holder would have an invulnerability pass into the PZ conversely he would not be able to attack non-ticket players and visa-versa. Once a ticket expires another appears in a freetown port for purchase the number of tickets available depends on tickets purchased by each nation (might require zone repositioning for Leogane and Deadmans). A higher number of tickets purchased by different Nations the higher the TOTAL number of tickets available. This would mean that 25v25 PZ battle could occur but 10 v1 would be unusual. By such a mechanic I would hope everyone gets a better chance of a good non-gank fight. Buster (shoot me!)
-
In defence of ganking (Sorry for new topic, I couldn't find the proper thread for this, and sorry its so long, i had a long sail ) Firstly, What is Ganking? 1. Sailing around in a large group looking for solo player or smaller group to sink them? 2. Sinking a trader? 3. Sinking a noob? 4. Sinking a solo player 1v1 when you are in a vastly superior ship? 5. Coming out with overwhelming force to sink an enemy fleet running hostility on your Port? 6. Coming out with overwhelming force to sink an enemy ganking fleet? 7. Coming out with overwhelming force to sink an enemy player who has been sinking noobs? The list is endless..which ones of these are acceptable and which are not? There is this idea that ganking is 'bad' and so we need new RoE to prevent it. 1.5 BR difference is the most common idea. But what will this achieve? It is going to prevent many of these types of play, some of them (if not most, and indeed maybe all) are perfectly legitimate imo. Even number 1. The most obvious 'bad' ganking has it's upside: It might be nice to sail around all day in a gold Belle Poule with Poods and Naval clock and carta etc looking for fights and yes its shit if you lose it to a gank. But a good captain is most likely going to beat everyone he meets 1v1 in a 'fair' fight. A very good one will win most if not all fights v 1.5 BR, certainly against the average majority like me. But if 8 reasonably experienced players meet you with some fast ships and a Bellona or two with them, then it doesn't matter how good you are, you might lose that Belle. So perhaps even this bad ganking is really a good thing in that it places at least some limits on just how much advantage experienced players can wield or at least how often? Atm even the very best players in the very best ships are in danger of losing them. If we start introducing BR limits to somehow make battles 'fairer'. Does this not just makes it nice and snuggly for the best and richest players to sail pimped out ships more often, safe in the knowledge they will nearly always win? Doesn't it also mean that average players and noobs will nearly always be outclassed when they meet more experienced players or groups of players? (not just in terms of skill but in terms of the ships too (an insurmountable disadvantage, a gank even?). If you sail to an enemy port and try to attack that nations players or run hostility against them then you should expect a large force to come out and try to prevent you. I think that is acceptable. So if you do that you had better take a really fast ship, and if you do that then your options are reduced and you might find, if you meet another player who has fit for duelling or PVE. (even if he is less experienced), he has a better chance of defending himself? As others have said, ganking also allows newer players to take part in PvP and be a genuine threat. They can make up for their cheap ships, basic upgrades and inexperience (restrictions on gaming time) through sheer numbers. Imposing BR limits on OW battles might just widen the gap between the elite few and the more casual majority and ultimately just alienate more people who will quickly learn they will never have the capacity to compete in meaningful PvP where they can win, and they will just quit. When the new PvP zones are introduced, players who want to, can go there for their fair fights and elite honour duels. OW RoE BR restrictions just restrict game play, frustrate players who cant enter a battle and all to fix a non-existent problem. It might also turn the game into a playground for the few rich and experienced players and the majority of new and less active players will get frustrated and leave. Then everyone loses. There are ways to minimise ganking anyway and a lot of players enjoy the challenge of playing solo and evading gank fleets and do so successfully. So let them gank I say.
- 61 replies
-
- 27
-
-
"Vier schnelle Fregatten schneiden der CHERUBIM den Weg zum Heimathafen ab. Bei vorteilhaftem Wind haben sie sie bald eingeholt, schießen ihre Segel in Fetzen, schießen dann die Mannschaft runter, und am Ende boardet ein speziell ausgerüstetes Schiff den Alleinfahrer." Soweit, so gut - alles okay - so war das eben manchmal - Pech gehabt. Aber was dann folgt, ist einfach nur übelster Mist aus einem drittklassigen Science-Fiction- B--Movie, der mich in einem sonst so schönen Spiel wie NAVAL ACTION schwer enttäuscht. Denn die Kommandeure der vier schnellen Fregatten setzen nun spezielle Schutzbrillen auf, schnallen sich auf die Warp-Sitze, und befehlen ihren Mannschaften: "Okay, das war's! Zieht die XXL-Tarnkappe über das ganze Schiff, und dann werft die YAMAHA Super-2000 Aussenborder an - und dann beamst Du uns hier schnellstens raus, Scotty!" Zuhause trinken sie dann was, freuen sich über den gelungenen Ganking-Abend und loben sich gegenseitig für ihre Heldentaten. Mann, jetzt hab ich mir auf die Schuhe gekotzt - sorry. Und die Moral meiner Geschicht: wer ganken will, sollte auch die Konsequenzen tragen. Mir ist es scheißegal, ob einer ins Bett muß, der zweite auf's Klo, der dritte telefonieren und der vierte noch Mutti zufriedenstellen - wer im Heimatgewässer einer feindlichen NATION rumfährt und gankt, der muß mit den Konsequenzen fertig werden. Jetzt aber kann das jede Gurkentruppe so ziemlich ungestraft tun. Denkt da eigentlich mal einer an die neuen Spieler, die dem zum Opfer fallen und gleich total entmutigt werden und einen Riesen-Verlust haben, oder die Trader, die die NATION versorgen und statt dessen Tausende verlieren, und dazu noch ihre INDIAMAN ? Hätte eine der historischen Nationen das ungesühnt geschehen lassen? So wie es jetzt ist kann es nicht bleiben - oder ich muß mir hier am PC Kotztüten aufhängen. Ich entschuldige mich bei allen, denen mein Ton auf den Magen geschlagen ist - nicht aber für den Inhalt.
-
Suggestion: PVP players of low XP can only be engageable by other players of a comparable XP or lower until they reach a certain level of XP. This may help keep ganking and griefing of new players in PVP to a minimum.
-
this is just a humble list I have gathered over some months of mostly the active clans and my experience of them along with what has been witnessed. also should any questions of BAITY be raised here is where you can talk freely. trusted - will generally do something if they say they will, i.e. not betray you should they say they will help gankers - this is NOT a list of clans who have ganked, but rather of those who CHOOSE to gank when there is another choice. non-gankers - those who have chosen on several occasions to not gank AND who sail around in fleets of fair size, i.e not disproportionate (10 1sts to go fight 3 etc) kiters - those who will not actually choose to fight a battle, but rather who choose to sail upwind waiting hours for the newbs to make a mistake, OR who run away for the majority of a battle, never committing to fight. will be edited with good enough evidence sent to - https://discord.gg/DkSd5fc TRUSTED LIBRA, ALOHA, PGP, HANSA, BCC, CSA, FLEKI, HYDRA, LSC, CRED, SNOW, TAYLER, RUS, CABRAL, DRAKE, HAVOK GANKERS BF, TALER, SH, BASTD, SLRN, WO, VLTRA, CBC, DNP, RUS, CABRAL, FELIX, WTF, BAIT, ARM, 7UP, SOL, SNOW NON-GANKERS NPG, BETEP, ALOHA, VINO, PDP, BCC, ALU, VCO, TSA, CSA, DRAKE, REDS, NN, RUBLI, DREAD, LIONS, VWIC, FLEKI, RED, NPG, SNOW KITERS VLTRA, SH, WTF, ARM, 7UP, KINGS, HRE, RUS, HAVOK, BETEP, BASTD, LIONS, HRE P.S what happens in the defense of newbs in the capital zone is not included. I doubt anyone cares what I think anyway. All is based on facts and evidence, terms and conditions apply, not sold separately, always read the label
- 10 replies
-
- 6
-
-
- reputation
- baity
- (and 3 more)
-
If you watch this video - "Le Gros Power" - you will see what is possible to do in NAVAL ACTION, when you only just use all gameplay mechanics smart. This is not an accusation against the players who made this video - I just want everyone to see how many things can be done in NA, which at least I do not regard as "right" or anyhow "realistic". (Sorry for my rude words in battle, Captain Reverse - you just did what can be done. Clever idea even, to come with high-speed LGVs like that. But I find this is far over the top and shouldn't be possible at all) https://www.twitch.tv/videos/167447882
-
Please rethink PvP, and PvP Events
karotte posted a topic in Current Feature Improvement Suggestions
Hey Folks! Dear developers, can't you rethink the whole PvP systhem? ATM it is a chase or try to run, gank or be ganked simulator. Many things take way to much time, so the most people are running even it is a fair fight. If you lose a ship, all of your officers lives, your upgrades, or your cargo, it takes WAY to much time to rebuilt. For example, to craft a renomee, with, lets say pirate refit, copper plating and speedtrim, it takes at least 2-5 days, if you craft all your needed materials by yourself, and ship them from a city like Gustavia, or Wilhelmstadt, or other capitals. What abought a Constitution? 7days? Come on! I understand that players lurk each other in the real world, mostly at least just massive insult each other, if they sink there ship. The penalties for loosing ar way to high! So what hapens? Everybody is running from a fight if you can, me too. One dura ships btw. are useless, caus you will lose all your Upgrades, which are mostly not craftable, but needed.... So why not make dura a thing that you can restore with gold and time? So when you have your first rate sunk, your dura droppes to zero, but you still keep your ship and upgrades and you need to pay 500.000 and wait 2 days till your dura is restored? Maybe the ships with restored dura may become slightly woser (lower hp, speed and armor) than new ones, but still usable. Even captured ships gain a second chance and at least some use then. The trader not looses 100 % of there goods, maybe only 30%, and the corsair will get a propper reward from the admirality, or the 30 % of the goods. Why not? Will make it at leas less serious but more fun and less punishing. The officer with 10 lives is also a miscreation, so people will mostly surrender. Cause level up a new officer will consume up to 6-8 houres. More time to grind, then using time to play trough a normal AA+ game. Make the game less grind and less useless sailing around (when you attract more players, the ocean will get more populated). PvP ist the core of this game, so reduce the penalties of loosing a fight, and we all get more fights and more fun. Even if you loose one. Give normal gamers with 5-8 hours gametime in a week, a chance to have some fun (no not just with cutters), dont frustrate them with grind when they lose a ship ind PvP and give them the chance to participate in bigger Events, then we will have full servers all the time. Dont listen to the gamers who say, that achiving something must be hard work. It should be a challange, but not "hard" work. hold fast Karotte- 28 replies
-
- 2
-
-
- fleets
- prizeships
- (and 8 more)
-
Hello! I’ve been playing Naval Action for quite a while now, and I feel the game has taken a wrong direction. First of all the name should be changed to Gangs of Naval Action (ironicJ). I like the introduction of newbie region and a lot of the new details with the new patch, having said this there is some stuff devs should take into consideration. My biggest disappointment is the perpetual ganking taking place all over the map. This is unacceptable! So I decide to make some suggestions: Player taggs should only be 1vs1 and no join timer or group join. Create more Nations, i acctually know this is coming but just in case. Pirates should NOT be a nation. Instead every nation should have their own pirates. Just like the check box for the smuggler make one for going pirate. Introduce War Zones instead of this ganking action in and around capital regions. The outcome of this wars should be the amount of traders NPCs coming in to a region. Introduce Pirate waters were the ganking is allowed and the players not enjoying being ganked can keep away. Well this was my major concerns with this game. Otherwise the game is glorious and I love it! Keep up the good work! P.S. remember devs: DO NOT BELIVE THAT PLAYERS WILL BEHAVE RESPONSABLY! Thanks for listening
-
Let's talk about "ganking". What is a gank? For most players it is any fight that they start with any perceived disadvantage. Let's talk about this game. This is a wide open world, very large. The odds of two fighting forces matching open sea and having a "fair" fight is remote, to say the least. So, intended or not, one side will usually be the "gankers" and the poor victims the "whiners on the forums". There is just no way around it in an open world pvp game. Or is there? Various mechanics have been tried that have all resulted in loss of playability, and in my experience, player loss (multiple games I have seen it). One of the giant attractions of this game for myself and others players I used to sail with was open world, unrestricted pvp. Then came the mechanics, BR mechanics that resulted in people missing fights or getting split, mechanics that favored the defender (open battles near port with social), forts, npc fleets around capitals, etc. Then personal fleets that intruded on the pvp, making it damn near impossible for a solo pirate to get much done. Either way, what did we see? People leave the game. Also, the failure to address a simple thing like battle screen camping. I often log out at battle screen, either because I have to log (usually) or because I know a fleet is waiting outside for me. Don't remove that, just incentive coming back out into the open sea with some help getting out of the immediate area. Long invisibility, even longer cannot join battles? Something so a player can leave a battle with some confidence of escaping a revenge fleet. Look, you can sail around this damn game for literally hours and never see a single player sometimes. And when you do, of course you and your mates all jump them because hallelujah it's a player to sink or capture. If anything, the game mechanics should favor and encourage those that sail near enemy ports to hunt. Give them a break. Make this game what it once was, cutthroat pvp and disregard the losers whining about ganking. Remember, for every one player crying about ganking, there are at least two more players high-fiving over his pool of tears and shattered timbers. Give us heat maps to find where the enemy does missions, trades, hides, whatever. Put the "Action" back into "Naval ACTION".
-
We got a lot of topics on this with everyone going back and forth to either buff or de-buff the ganker/gankee. Some even change their minds as they go from gankee to ganker or vica versa. For those there is for example the thread: http://forum.game-labs.net/index.php?/topic/14485-hiding-in-battle-screens-solved I just want to toss out a suggestion and see how it flies without any side pollution. So lets do a simple yes or no to: People coming onto Open World either out of Port of Battle Screen must all have a 30 second no attack timer and a 120 second no join timer.The goals: Promote folks who come out. Anybody visible on OW can join the fray, nobody else. [edit 2016-06-25] added "open world entry" tag -
The definitive Battle Screen Ganking Guide First of all we establish our main strategy here. It basically boils down to Guerre de Course. Although we won't limit ourselves to simple traders, but rather anything that is an economical target. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naval_strategy#Introduction_of_the_guerre_de_course We also ensure that we have the upper hand continously. Defeat in detail works both ways, so we must always keep the initiative. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defeat_in_detail Current mechanic of entering open world: http://forum.game-labs.net/index.php?/topic/14536-to-gank-or-be-ganked-that-is-the-question/ Fleet composition: A couple of fast interceptors, for example Rattlesnakes. Anything grey that can keep up. From a profit/loss perspective this makes losing the ship irrelevant. Or, bring a gold escorted by a fast grey with the same wind profile. The grey will be your getaway ship after you TP back the gold. To set up the initial battle screen there are a number of options:Tag a friendly smuggler. Doesn't matter what class of ship. Tag any form of enemy AI ship, so as to not give away our position. Not ideal, but coming out of a previous gank. To ensure visibility to the outside world keep a fast interceptor out of the battle instance. Victims lovingly refer to him as the bait ship.To deal with a revenge fleet, a scout is always send out first or called in from staging area. If the area is clear come out and prepare for the next gank, otherwise use the escape ship or log-off and boot up your alt. Dealing with potential future mechanics: Invisibility. Use this to direct the gank fleet invisibly onto the victim. Perfect. Choosing your own spawn-in (/invisibility) be used to pass any blockade. Log-off timer or open world kick timer. Log-off immediately, log back on when the command comes over TS. BS waiting will become Shard waiting. Pop where you are. Setup gank just at visibility of coast, sail to coast and gank when trader comes past. Once the tag on a victim starts, enter open world and gank away.Please let me know if I missed anything. [edit] Added pop where you are. [edit] how-to bypass blockades
- 12 replies
-
- 3
-
-
- battle screen
- ganking
- (and 1 more)
-
Yesterday upon the stair(Port Morant - Carlisle) I met a man(French, Danes) who wasn't there(hiding in battle results/logging off) He wasn't there again today(randomly people from yesterday log in and pop out around the port) I wish, I wish he'd go away(or start playing an actual PvP game instead of using this exploit) The British nation would appreciate if the ganker fleets in the area of Carlisle would not use the battle result hiding exploits to end the night of PvP after a single attack. If you're short on time Jamaica is the wrong place for an attack and if you're afraid to lose your ship the same applies. Especially a fleet of 22 should not be afraid to actually go for a genuine fight which could've provided everyone with a lot of fun. Personally I see no fun/challenge in ganking but if you do it please be ready to face all repercussions that may come upon you instead of wasting everybody's time and fun after jumping a little clanless cerberus with 22 ships. As far as I and those I can vouch for are concerned we will not be backing away from a fight that we brought on our own and will now be attacking your homeports with fair fights. Please consider doing the same in the interest of a fun game for all. A little further warning: It has come to our attention that some smaller ganking fleets now actively search for an ai ship close to KPR to create such battle result screen situation. WIth the intention of this being the last action of the night they apparently log off so they can have an invisible fleet ready to attack in the early afternoon near our homeports. This goes beyond merely trying to save one's hide and is in my/our eyes an unacceptable misuse of the mechanic. We've started to collect evidence on this and should this behaviour not rapidly disappear I will launch a tribunal about this! To the devs: Please consider reworking the battle result screen asap as it currently proofs to be an exploited hassle for all fair playing folk around the isle and surely in other places as well. P.S.: I used the words 'the British nation' as a lot of people are seriously unhappy about this. Should you however take offense to me representing you here just substitue this for my own persona. Also this is a somewhat serious topic - have fun discussing it but serious forum pvp as some practice it is not desired here! Keep it civil everybody! For those who liked the poem: Antigonish - William Hughes Mearns Yesterday upon the stair I met a man who wasn't there He wasn't there again today I wish, I wish he'd go away When I came home last night at three The man was waiting there for me But when I looked around the hall I couldn't see him there at all! Go away, go away, don't you come back anymore! Go away, go away, and please don't slam the door Last night I saw upon the stair A little man who wasn't there He wasn't there again today Oh, how I wish he'd go away
- 48 replies
-
- 10
-
-
So today I was sailing my privateer around and got tagged/ganked by a group of 5: 2 connies, 1 trinc, 1 surprise, and 1 frigate I believe. I really don't mind bc I'm learning pvp & running but with that br they should not be able to tag such a small ship as the privateer. I'm curious as to how tagging actually works. Is there even a br percentage cap (i.e. In order to tag, the tag group br cannot be more than 120% greater) or such? If not, there should be to reduce ganking. If there is such a mechanic, it needs fixing. -
This is a suggestion against ganking and to increase low risk/gain ratio in uneven PvP situations to create more incentive to fight instead of running away in different ad-hoc OS fight scenarios. If a battle rating system to enter instances, like the group strength in PotBS, might be added or not, is irrelevant for this concept. Here the battle ratings are being used to dynamicly adjust the XP and gold gain in various OS PvP fights. Dynamic PvP Reward System: After the battle is closed, the battle ratings for both sides are being used to calculate an extra PvP loot factor according to the BR ratio (Battle Rating) both for XP and gold. Lets say you are in a 3v1 battle and battle ratings are 200 for the attacker and 100 for the defender (one ship). The lonely ship might have a slight chance to sink enemy ship(s), but usualy this risk won't be taken by the majority of players. However, according to the extra loot factor introduced here, whatever damage he does, he could get double XP and gold for his efforts due to the fighting in an outnumbered and outgunned situation. On the otherside of the coin, each player of the ganking side would recieve half of the XP and gold compared to if they would sink the same ship in an even fight. To sum up, in a 200/100 ratio battle, this concept means double XP and gold for the defender and 0,5x less XP and for both attackers. PvP Loot Factor = BR of your team / BR of opposing team Final XP/Gold = Current Loot Gain / PvP Loot Factor Different scenarios can be seen from the table/graph. This could be enough incentive to demote the ganking, however, if the ganking still occurs, this would also give the ganked side a reason to fight back despite the fact being outnumbered and outgunned. An example for the realization of similar concept, the Microsoft Gaming Zone used to have similar rating system for many years, for instance in the legendary Age of Empires series matchmaking. The proposed loot balancing/stabilizing concept according to battle ratings would be a nice feature for the good of the game. Poll removed by mod team for being non-essential to the discussion.- 36 replies
-
- 10
-
-
A post Amp made in the Ganking Petition thread gave me an idea. As he said, many RL factors protected smaller ships, i.e. storms, the cover of night, and the vast ocean itself. Now, rather then making game mechanics all about creating even battles, why not incorporate game features that give smaller ships their historical, real life advantage? Feel free to post ideas you might have that will give small ships a realistic advantage while keeping out, to an extent, the gamey mechanics that cause so much controversy. There's more than one way to solve this problem and keep (mostly) everyone happy. Let's try and stay on topic, folks
-
Hi, as mentioned by admin in the big ROE thread, lots of ppl are suggesting the implementation of an Honour system, but not a detailed plan has been delivered. Challenge accepted, here are my 1st thoughts on it, pls feel free to comment, find loopholes and suggest improvements. I'll try to recap and summarize. Every player starts of with a default value of 100%. Your actions in the game will let you improve or decrease your honour value. Honour recalculation is only applied when: - You're in a battle with at least 1 enemy player (ganking AI wont harm you're BR, check 4th bullet) - Your side initiates the battle - The battle rating has a difference of >50% - When a player joins the enemy-side in a battle of you ganking AI, his/her stupidity wont affect your honour. AI is also calculated in the battle rating, therefore a battle between 1 player lynx and 1 AI lynx vs 1 player lynx is still a dishonourable fight for the player with the AI on his side. (note to admin, this also implies autospawning of AI and getting AI sucked into a battle should be removed from the game) For every battle initiated with a + 50% BR the honour of the captain will drop by 1% For every battle initiated with a -50% BR the honour will rise by 0.1% Honour is easily lost, but harder to build up, like IRL. If the BR ratings are even more diverse, more points will be reduced/ gained. For example: 100% difference: 2 points down, or 0.2 points up, 150% difference: 4points down, or 0.4 points up, 200%, 8 points down etcetera etcetera. The bigger the gank, the harder the penalty in honour. Penal system: Honour above 95% is not having any effects on your income and rank. But... 95-90% honour: XP and gold income from all battles will be reduced by 20% (also counts for selling ships and trade) 90-85% honour: XP and gold income reduced by 50%, player ranks above master and commander are demoted 1 rank. 85-80% honour: XP and gold reduced by 80%, player demotes to a master and commander on instance. 80-0% honour: player is brought to justice at the admirality and wont be able to play before his case has been processed, possible penalties: demoting to ensign, banned from the nation (thus become a pirate in a lynx). Reward system: Again honour between 100 and 105 is not doing anything for you, just feel proud. 105-110%: XP and gold income increase by 5% 110-115%: XP and gold income increase by 10% 115-120%: 10% increase, also better officers are available for your ships and will stay with you as long as your honour is 115 or above. 120-125%: same perks as 115-120, but now you are allowed to start your own industries and get a rank above rear admiral 125-1000 : now you are a valued and respected member of you nation, perks are open for debate. It all depends on who initiates the battle, so a lynx attacking a bigger ship wont devalue the honour of the attacked, nor can he complain about being ganked when the attacker gets reinforced and ganks him. He/she should learn a lesson here, maybe it wasnt such a good idea to attack that ship in those waters... as a honour protection, the captain who initiates a battle must be warned when other players want to join his side, he/she can then allow those players to join and therefore avoid being portrayed as a ganker without his own doing. It still is a rough concept, needs work and finetuning. So let the debate begin... Grtzzz Bubbles
-
Hi everyone, In a recent thread, there was a discussion about ganking and how to protect newer players from the possibility of getting ganked around spawn ports and areas lying close by. There were several solutions presented, like grace period, no fire zones, etc. They are good ideas and they might work, but I would like to propose more "realistic" solution, which is grounded in a real world. Dynamic Admirality Missions Let's say real life Great Britain had many vessels attacked and sunk in an area around Antigua. The Navy would start paying attention to that region and start patrolling the areas in order to protect their citizens. (Most evident in getting rid of piracy in Carribean, but also in modern times around Somalia). In game, the AI would count all deaths until it finds an area, which could be interpreted as very dangerous for it vessels. Then it would start issuing missions to its members to go and patrol that area for 2 hours in the next 2 days, with a ship given to them according to their standing in the navy, amount and types of other ships given for the mission and the severity of the situation. I.e. if there are 7 ships sunk in the area of Antigua in the last 2 days, there will be 2 surprises given to players and 1 Trincomalee, since the area is not very dangerous. If there are 700 ships sunk in the area of Antigua in the last 2 days, the AI would issue 20 bellonas, 10 vics, 50 Trincomalees for a protection of the area. This also creates a reason why to join a nation under siege (you will rise quickly in ranks of your Navy, therefore will be able to sail SoLs and heavy frigates quickly). Such missions also create a purpose for SOLs, since the current model in OW (very alpha I know), is much more rewarding for frigate players. It is only an early idea, with many different posibilities, but I find it most realistic. Please discuss what do you guys think.
-
Is this game only going to be "survivable" by either joining a guild/clan or by paying "protection" to a guild/clan? While I can understand the immersion effect of being in the Royal Navy or the U.S. Navy, In reality I am a US Citizen and free to do as I like with my time. I may not really want to play Admiral or be bossed around by someone wanting to play Admiral - do I have a choice in this game? ---- I guess what I am asking is have the guilds/clans ALREADY taken over the game being as most of them are run by Moderators? I really wanted to just play a fun "age of sail" game and then go to dinner/live my life - do I really have to join a guild/clan just to play?
